From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Samuelsson Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:49:05 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot and OpenEmbedded In-Reply-To: <5f2b60908131255l128ec735r2b07c70e7bb46df9@mail.gmail.com> References: <5f2b60908130604i7175f89h533d1b8f8444e60f@mail.gmail.com> <87a5b0800908130628i760f152eu84237eb985227c36@mail.gmail.com> <5f2b60908131255l128ec735r2b07c70e7bb46df9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A8C6541.3080002@atmel.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Bj?rn Forsman skrev: > 2009/8/13 Will Newton : >> 2009/8/13 Bj?rn Forsman : >>> Hi all, >>> >>> When I started out with embedded Linux, Buildroot was of great help. >>> It built a working cross toolchain and a rootfs for me and I was very >>> pleased with it. (Thanks a lot to all developers!) At the same time I >>> had tried OpenEmbedded (OE) without much of a success: it was too >>> complex for me and I could not get it to build anything. Now, about >>> two years later, I started using OE at work and have had very good >>> experiences with it. So good that I must think carefully about why I >>> should use Buildroot for my next project, and not OE. I guess the main >>> reason (for me at least) for thinking about using Buildroot is its >>> easy menu configuration. But at the same time it feels like OE has >>> more to offer in terms of its build system and its package set. >>> >>> What do you guys think? What does Buildroot provide that OE does not? >>> And another thing: could/should the two projects be merged? >> The reasons I have chosen buildroot over OpenEmbedded are: >> >> 1. Simplicity. >> >> OE seems to have lots of config files and an unfamiliar interface. BR >> lets people configure their root fs in the same way as their kernel. > > Yes, the BR configuration system is very nice. I still don't know how > to fully customize OE builds, I just build a base image and use opkg > to add extra packages :-) (Note that I haven't spent much time trying > to build a custom image either.) It is BLACK MAGIC!!! But I have something running now... > >> 2. Bitbake. >> >> Asking users to install often very recent versions of a leftfield tool >> is difficult. BR has a minimum of external dependencies, which is >> great when your users insist on using 3 year old distros. ;-) >> Also Makefiles are something almost all software engineers understand >> so it reduces the support burden for me. > > I wish OE could do without bitbake. But once it is installed, its not > so bad :-) Regarding distro dependencies, I believe OE does quite > well. AFAIK, all native tools that OE needs on the host are simply > built from OE recipes. This gives complete control over the build > environment. On the other hand, building all native tools makes the > initial build, which is already very long, even longer. > Core i7/6GB < 2 hours for x11-gpe-image >> The things I perceive to be better about OE are: >> >> 1. Wider range of packages. >> 2. Probably more vibrant community and more commercial involvement. > > Agree. May I also add that OE built images are named by configuration > and build date, eliminating the need for manually copying/renaming the > resulting binaries so that they are not overwritten by subsequent > (experimental) builds. I remember having manually backed up many BR > binaries before :-) We have had a long discussion about this early this year. It is not popular to call linux anything else but uImage. I have reintroduced a proper naming scheme (in my opinion) in my personal git on the buildroot server, where I build 2.6.30.2, u-boot-2009.08-rc2 and at91bootstrap-2.13-rc3 for the AT91, but it needs a lot more testing. Help appreciated. > Thanks for your reply, Will. I hope to hear more from BR users that > have had some experience with OE, why or for what they use BR and not > OE. Maybe I have to ask the OE mailing list if there are anyone there > with BR background too :-) Buildroot is good to hand out to beginners, for them to learn. It can do a good job for non-graphic applications. If you want an advanced user-interface, then you go OE. Big Guys are doing OE, but you need to spend more time to get things done. > Regards, > Bj?rn Forsman > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot at busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot